Project European Union has hit another snag 's and a fairly daunting one. Irish voters, for reasons obscure and puzzling, have rejected the Lisbon Treaty, the EU's latest attempt to provide itself with an operational structure more capable of facing the challenges of the 21st century. The outcome was surprising given 1) how much the Irish have benefited since joining the European Union and 2) how little, if at all, the treaty would affect their lives. The Lisbon Treaty, a stripped down version of the earlier Constitutional Treaty, which failed miserably, essentially regulated how Brussels will work, not Dublin. Yet the Irish slammed the document in what can be perceived to be an orgy of euroskepticism.
Granted, Irish leaders didn't try very hard 's and that's putting it mildly. Charlie McCreevy, Ireland's commissioner on European Commission, the EU's executive arm, admitted in an interview that he didn't even bother reading the Lisbon Treaty. Too daunting, he suggested. Four days before the referendum was held on June 12, McCreevy went to Washington on a visit, clearly showing where his priorities are. When all was said and done, his feeble defense of the result was the following: "We should remember that Ireland is not alone in being unable to secure a popular endorsement of a European Treaty," an allusion to the French and Dutch rejections of Constitutional Treaty.
Oddly enough, the Irish, the only EU citizens who will be given the chance to vote on the Lisbon Treaty, have been through this song and dance before. In 2001 they rejected the Treaty of Nice, a landmark document that amended the European Union's two founding treaties 's the Treaty of Rome and the Maastricht Treaty 's and essentially charts out how the EU works today. Some 54 percent of Irish voters rejected the Nice treaty, which subsequently constituted the only defeat for the document during the ratification process. However, less than 35 percent of registered voters in Ireland participated in the poll, which gave pause to leaders in both Dublin and Brussels. After regrouping forces, the pro-EU camp managed to swing another referendum 16 months later, in October 2002, and this time turnout swelled to 50 percent, with 63 percent voting to support the Nice treaty.
Thus if history is any precedent, there is hope that the Irish could be swayed should another referendum be held. Already there is talk of offering Ireland "sweeteners" in either the treaty itself or budgetary handouts. Yet others are likely to be disinclined to approve a second referendum, since another "no" vote would spell a catastrophic embarrassment for Brussels. Regardless, folks like McCreevy will have to try a bit harder if they want to sway not only the Irish but disheartened citizens from Lisbon to Lapland. As one European Parliament member was quoted as saying, "You cannot allow the 'no' to win because the 'yes' is not doing anything."
McCreevy is right about one thing. The Irish 's or for that matter, nearly all EU citizens 's don't understand the Lisbon Treaty. But it need not be confusing. The document's essential purpose is to make the EU, which now has 12 more members than during the "Nice era," work more effectively. That shouldn't be a hard sell. It's just a matter of being a good salesman.
